Fun with a Gloss Meter ;)

Calendyr

Calendyr

New member
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
3,996
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I received my Gloss Meter by courrier directly from China monday and today I had some time to play with it.

I would post images but this forum is amazingly hostile to image posting. Everytime I try to upload something it tells me it's too big and when I try to use image URLs from other websites it gives me an error. So, sorry, no images.

So today was a beautiful day and I only had one appointment which ended at 2 pm. I was home by 3pm so I decided to give the gloss meter a few things to test.

I have been wanting to apply a ceramic coating to my car for 3 years and never have the time. Only free time I have is when weather is bad, and I can't apply a coating in bad weather... so tough luck for me ;) Today was different. I knew I only had about 6 hours of sunlight left if I started immediatelly so I decided to simply cut each step a little bit and be able to do the job in 5 hours instead of the usual 7.

I took a reading before doing anything to have a baseline with a dirty car : 92.1 GU. My car is silver and the paint is almost in perfect condition. So a high gloss before touching it was what I was expecting.

Started with a pressure wash of the car
Followed by Iron Decon with Ferrous Dweller
Pressure rinsed it all off
Then did a rinseless wash with ONR

Also did mechanical decon with Optimum's clay towel. Meh. It kept sticking to the panels, not a big fan of these small towels so far. I think NanoSkin sponges are a better product. Also after doing the car the towel is all gummed up and I could not find a way to get it clean. Will have to talk to Yvan about it ;(

After drying the car, I took the first gloss reading: 96.4 GU (that is an average but the numbers varied very little between readings)

I decided to do a very quick compound step just to see how it would affect the reading. The paint did not need compounding. So I took Meguiars D300 with my Rupes ES21, slapped on a Lake Country ThinPro orange pad and did 2 slow passes on the hood. Repeated the process on the trunk. After IPA wipedown I took a reading of 101.5 GU. Pretty impressive for a compound, I would be very curious to see how M105 would compare.

I then proceeded to polish the trunk with M205. As far as I know M205 is the polish that gives the best finish, so I wanted an other baseline. I used a Buff&Shine green light polishing pad on the Rupes ES21 and did 3 medium speed passes. I could have worked it longer and probably would have gotten a higher reading but I was pressed for time ;)
So the reading after IPA wipedown was 107.4 GU.

I then proceeded to apply CarPro Essence on both the panel that was polished with M205 and the one that was only compounded. I wanted to see if polishing before applying Essence would make any difference. I used an other Buff&Shine green light polishing pad on the Rupes ES21 and did 3 fast speed passes.
I got identical readings on both panels: 103 GU. This surprised me cause I always felt Essence gave the best gloss of all the polishes because of the fillers. So 2 things here: 1) Maybe the fillers are blocking the metal flakes in the paint reducing the gloss a little. 2) Essence being a SiO2 product needs time to cure to obtain maximum gloss. I took the readings immediatelly after application so it is very possible it would have improved after some time had passed. But it's still surprising to me that M205 had a better finish ;)

I then proceeded to coat the entire car with McKee's 37 paint coating. This is the original formula, not the improved one. After application, gloss was reduced to 100.5 GU. That surprised me. I know it takes about a week for a coating to get it's maximum gloss, once the cure process is done... but I was not expecting it to reduce the gloss.

Finally, I applied CarPro Reload on top of the coating to protect it while it cures. Did my typical method of spraying a microfiber towel 4 times to do the first panel, then twice more for each panel after. I then buff off with a microfiber towel with very short nap.
Final reading after Reload: 97.1 GU an other surprise. I am thinking Reload needs to cure as well to get max gloss.

I think I will take a reading tomorrow to see if numbers have improved.

All and all, I think this is a very nice tool to have. When I work on cars that really need it (like I usually do), there should be a huge gap between the initial number of the final one. I know paint in bad condition can easilly get in the 50-60 GU range. So if I can get that to almost double, I think it would make for great pictures ;)
 
Calendyr said:
I would post images but this forum is amazingly hostile to image posting. Everytime I try to upload something it tells me it's too big and when I try to use image URLs from other websites it gives me an error. So, sorry, no images.
Click to expand...

Have you tried the Tapatalk app through your smartphone?
 
Great stuff, try one panel with a carnuaba and see results again.
 
Eldorado2k said:
Have you tried the Tapatalk app through your smartphone?
Click to expand...

Yes, said images were too big. I installed the app just to upload picture too ;) I don't read forum on my phone, would drive me crazy ;)
 
Calendyr said:
Yes, said images were too big. I installed the app just to upload picture too ;) I don't read forum on my phone, would drive me crazy ;)
Click to expand...

And they were pics you took with the phone? I’ve never had it tell me that... What kind of phone do you have?
 
Won't be doing more testing on my car since it's now coated. But I will be doing more tests for sure. I think this gadget will prove to be quite useful to compare compounds, polishes, sealants, waxes, glazes, cleaners and all sorts of other things I can't think about right now ;)

Doing a 1 step on a Golf R tomorrow. I might do a test panel with a compound and a sealant to compare results ;)
 
And they were pics you took with the phone? I’ve never had it tell me that... What kind of phone do you have?
 
Calendyr said:
Hey guys, I received my Gloss Meter by courrier directly from China monday and today I had some time to play with it.

I would post images but this forum is amazingly hostile to image posting. Everytime I try to upload something it tells me it's too big and when I try to use image URLs from other websites it gives me an error. So, sorry, no images.

So today was a beautiful day and I only had one appointment which ended at 2 pm. I was home by 3pm so I decided to give the gloss meter a few things to test.

I have been wanting to apply a ceramic coating to my car for 3 years and never have the time. Only free time I have is when weather is bad, and I can't apply a coating in bad weather... so tough luck for me ;) Today was different. I knew I only had about 6 hours of sunlight left if I started immediatelly so I decided to simply cut each step a little bit and be able to do the job in 5 hours instead of the usual 7.

I took a reading before doing anything to have a baseline with a dirty car : 92.1 GU. My car is silver and the paint is almost in perfect condition. So a high gloss before touching it was what I was expecting.

Started with a pressure wash of the car
Followed by Iron Decon with Ferrous Dweller
Pressure rinsed it all off
Then did a rinseless wash with ONR

Also did mechanical decon with Optimum's clay towel. Meh. It kept sticking to the panels, not a big fan of these small towels so far. I think NanoSkin sponges are a better product. Also after doing the car the towel is all gummed up and I could not find a way to get it clean. Will have to talk to Yvan about it ;(

After drying the car, I took the first gloss reading: 96.4 GU (that is an average but the numbers varied very little between readings)

I decided to do a very quick compound step just to see how it would affect the reading. The paint did not need compounding. So I took Meguiars D300 with my Rupes ES21, slapped on a Lake Country ThinPro orange pad and did 2 slow passes on the hood. Repeated the process on the trunk. After IPA wipedown I took a reading of 101.5 GU. Pretty impressive for a compound, I would be very curious to see how M105 would compare.

I then proceeded to polish the trunk with M205. As far as I know M205 is the polish that gives the best finish, so I wanted an other baseline. I used a Buff&Shine green light polishing pad on the Rupes ES21 and did 3 medium speed passes. I could have worked it longer and probably would have gotten a higher reading but I was pressed for time ;)
So the reading after IPA wipedown was 107.4 GU.

I then proceeded to apply CarPro Essence on both the panel that was polished with M205 and the one that was only compounded. I wanted to see if polishing before applying Essence would make any difference. I used an other Buff&Shine green light polishing pad on the Rupes ES21 and did 3 fast speed passes.
I got identical readings on both panels: 103 GU. This surprised me cause I always felt Essence gave the best gloss of all the polishes because of the fillers. So 2 things here: 1) Maybe the fillers are blocking the metal flakes in the paint reducing the gloss a little. 2) Essence being a SiO2 product needs time to cure to obtain maximum gloss. I took the readings immediatelly after application so it is very possible it would have improved after some time had passed. But it's still surprising to me that M205 had a better finish ;)

I then proceeded to coat the entire car with McKee's 37 paint coating. This is the original formula, not the improved one. After application, gloss was reduced to 100.5 GU. That surprised me. I know it takes about a week for a coating to get it's maximum gloss, once the cure process is done... but I was not expecting it to reduce the gloss.

Finally, I applied CarPro Reload on top of the coating to protect it while it cures. Did my typical method of spraying a microfiber towel 4 times to do the first panel, then twice more for each panel after. I then buff off with a microfiber towel with very short nap.
Final reading after Reload: 97.1 GU an other surprise. I am thinking Reload needs to cure as well to get max gloss.

I think I will take a reading tomorrow to see if numbers have improved.

All and all, I think this is a very nice tool to have. When I work on cars that really need it (like I usually do), there should be a huge gap between the initial number of the final one. I know paint in bad condition can easilly get in the 50-60 GU range. So if I can get that to almost double, I think it would make for great pictures ;)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't read to much into it your eyes will be a better indicator then the gloss meter. To many factors to consider that could change the reading.

I would expect the paint to get the best reading after using m205 because as Mike Phillips says waxes and coatings are the great equalizer. They tone down gloss after a polish
 
I can see where a Gloss Meter would be a great, even powerful marketing tool for anyone that details cars for money, kind of like a Paint Thickness Gauge.

Simply get permission first from a prospective customer to do a Test Spot on the hood or trunk lid. (a place you can look down on and also easily place a gloss meter).

Then do a Test Spot and afterwards, use the Gloss Meter to show before and after differences to the customer. The machine would basically show or market to the car owner the potential the paint on their car has if they let the detailer detail the car and basically repeat the process used for the Test Spot over the rest of the car.


Hmmm...

:)
 
As for images - you need to resize them to a practical size otherwise all the humongous pictures our phones and cameras create would fill up a server on no time fo no good reason.

Look at the volume of pictures I post every week?

I simplevresizecthem to 800 pixelscwide before uploading.

It’s really no that hard.

:)
 
which one did you buy? PM Me if it's easier.

Thanks!
 
Well I must be lucky and have my picture settings right without even knowing, because I’ve never had it tell me a picture is too large to post. I just choose “best” and it posts it.

031e8de6b6f2fa84063be1eca6db4237.jpg
 
fightnews said:
because as Mike Phillips says waxes and coatings are the great equalizer. They tone down gloss after a polish
Click to expand...


Hey thanks for reading and remembering... I still plan on writing that article... :xyxthumbs:


I would not describe the effect of applying a wax, sealant or coating to a compounded and polished surface as "tone down gloss" as you say, but rather to shmoo over and create a uniform appearance that will hold up over time.

Just to point out, most compounds and polishes are water soluble and contain some form of lubricating oils or agents so the abrasives simply don't scour the surface. These oils will wash off with,

  1. Exposure to rain
  2. Repeated washing with normal wash or rinseless was
  3. Repeated wiping with anything with water and cleaners i.e. spray detailers, waterless washers


So what a car wax, synthetic paint sealant or a ceramic paint coating will do is create a uniform appearance that will hold up over time. Thus the reason I say no matter what the results of a compound or polish, or brand of tool, or style of tool, or type of finishing pad and even a person's technique "can" create a more perfect finish after wipe-off the last step abrasive product, (usually a polish), and could show up as a "difference" to a gloss meter or to the human eyes, that after the application of the wax, sealant or coating the difference from the above process will be nullified as the application of the wax, sealant or coating will create a uniform appearance and in some cases, "yes" tone down the highest of gloss and clarity results. It shouldn't be considered a "bad thing" when you factor in 99.9% of the people that want to detail their car not only want it to look good but they want the results to last a long time. The "last a long time" factor cannot be achieved by compounding and polishing alone.


Hope the above makes sense, I don't normally like to go deep but I can.


:)
 
And people are always saying that there is no real differences looks wise between LSP's. At least they can't perceive any differences.
 
Good test! I would say your results are matching what I've been seeing. Mainly, peak gloss readings after the IPA step after polishing. A heavy LSP like Reload that leaves behind a lot of residuals will definitely impact the readings more significantly in the short term compared to other products that wipe cleaner, give Reload a wash and you'll see those numbers come back up. So for me, the measurement directly after applying and buffing the product from the paint (whether it's a polish or LSP), this merely tells me how clean of a wipedown I'm getting. The measurement after the IPA/panel wipe or standard baseline wash that dissolves those oils is a more accurate measurement of the gloss of the product.
 
Calendyr said:
I would post images but this forum is amazingly hostile to image posting.

Every time I try to upload something it tells me it's too big and when I try to use image URLs from other websites it gives me an error.

So, sorry, no images.
Click to expand...


At a minimum, here's what you need to do...

1: Make sure there are no empty spaces in the file name for a picture. Most devices can read and display an image file like this,

Here is my picture.jpg


But the above format will NOT work on the Internet and will not upload to a gallery. Image files must not have any blank spaces. So this will work,

Hereismypicture.jpg

Here-is-my-picture.jpg

Here_is_my_picture.jpg


I only point this out because I know some people try to upload pictures that have a "space" in the file name because they simply don't know this will work on your computer but won't work on the Internet. It's called an URL Address and everything on the Internet needs a correctly named file.


2: Resize the file size of your pictures. Modern cameras and modern phones take HUGE file size pictures and if Autogeek let everyone and their brother and sister upload the picture in the size your camera or phone creates it we would fill up a "server" somewhere in the blogosphere and then have to pay for the next server service, and this would continue forever. So instead, the gallery here on the AG forum has setting that we can customize to limit how large of a photo can be uploaded. You can actually upload a fairly large photo as long as you only upload one at a time. I did this with this picture.

This picture started out at 5000+ pixels wide. I resized it to 3000 pixels wide which is still HUGE. If it doesn't appear full size in your browser or devise >click< on it and it will go to full size.


3000_May_2018_Class_001.JPG



Then here is the 800 pixel size version.

800_May_2018_Class_001.JPG



When I first got on this thing we call the "Internet" back in 1993, I didn't know how to resize and upload and then insert pictures? I invested a small amount of time and taught myself how to do it. And here's the good news, I've written articles that flatten out the learning curve and show you how to do it.

I use Easy Thumbnails every day. And here's my article on how to set up this free software so you can use it too...


How to resize your photos with Easy Thumbnails - Free software


I wrote the above article in 2011 - that's 7 years ago as I type.

Anyone can read it and figure it out. And if you have any questions or if you can't figure it out? I'm happy to help you. Simply call me when you're behind your computer and you can see I'm active on the forum.


1-800-869-3011 x206


Always happy to help people learn how to detail cars and work with pictures on the Internet. I don't think any of the other guys that claim to teach car detailing do this? But I'm happy to help.



:)
 
Loach said:
Good test! I would say your results are matching what I've been seeing. Mainly, peak gloss readings after the IPA step after polishing. A heavy LSP like Reload that leaves behind a lot of residuals will definitely impact the readings more significantly in the short term compared to other products that wipe cleaner, give Reload a wash and you'll see those numbers come back up. So for me, the measurement directly after applying and buffing the product from the paint (whether it's a polish or LSP), this merely tells me how clean of a wipedown I'm getting. The measurement after the IPA/panel wipe or standard baseline wash that dissolves those oils is a more accurate measurement of the gloss of the product.
Click to expand...

It kinda sounds like those gloss meters are wired wrong... You say that readings spike back up once you’ve removed any polishing oils? IMO it’s the polishing oils etc. that make the paint pop immediately after using a product, whether it’s a polish, wax, sealant etc. If I’m going to remove the polishing oils or whatever else the product left behind then why even bother polishing? To remove swirls? Lets say I didn’t have any swirls to begin with... Then what would’ve been the point in me polishing the paint if I’m simply going to wipe it clean of any shine enhancing goodness the product left behind?

Am I the only 1 who notices things like darkening of the paint on a dark vehicle after applying a good sealant? Or how about HD Speed? Are we to believe the fillers/oils in the Montan wax really don’t look good based on what some gloss meter reads?

It kinda sounds like a load of crock. Am I wrong to trust my own eyes over some electronic “gloss meter”? If I “waxed” my car and afterwards it “claimed” my paint was glossier before I bothered to do it I’d send it back and get a refund.
 
I guess gloss level is not everything then. It's only one method of measurement. Can't consider it the 'end all be all' of measurements regarding LSP's
 
Maybe it should be called a “clean meter”

I’ll keep my gloss enhancing products, thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top